Abstract
Objective In this study, we addressed the influence of the observer's background and experience on the accuracy of imaging-based tumor measurements. The consistency of measures with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) vs. WHO criteria is also reported. Study design and setting Twenty-five observers (five radiologists, five thoracic surgeons, five radiotherapists, five pulmonologists, and five medical oncologists) were asked to measure three lesions on selected serial chest computed tomographic images from three non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. The observers were asked to measure the longest diameter (RECIST), along with its perpendicular diameter (WHO criteria). Measurements by radiologists were used as reference values. Results There was no significant difference in the accuracy of measurements among the different groups. The highest intraobserver consistency was achieved by radiologists. Neither familiarity with measuring tumor lesions nor years since the MD degree correlated with measurement accuracy. A comparison of RECIST and WHO criteria showed consistent response ratings (κ=.74, CI 95%=.57-.91). Conclusion Measurements of selected lesions were consistent among specialists, suggesting that assessment of tumor response is reliable even when it is not done by radiologists.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 804-808 |
| Number of pages | 5 |
| Journal | Journal of Clinical Epidemiology |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue number | 8 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - Aug 2004 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Interdisciplinary comparison
- Lung cancer
- RECIST
- Tumor measurement
- WHO criteria
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Medicine(all)
- Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
- Epidemiology
Cite this
Tumor measurements on computed tomographic images of non-small cell lung cancer were similar among cancer professionals from different specialties. / Grossi, Francesco; Belvedere, Ornella; Fasola, Gianpiero; Ceschia, Tino; Meduri, Stefano; Sibau, Angela; Sacco, Cosimo; Bazzocchi, Massimo; Talmassons, Giovanni; Morelli, Angelo; Barbone, Fabio; Sobrero, Alberto.
In: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Vol. 57, No. 8, 08.2004, p. 804-808.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Tumor measurements on computed tomographic images of non-small cell lung cancer were similar among cancer professionals from different specialties
AU - Grossi, Francesco
AU - Belvedere, Ornella
AU - Fasola, Gianpiero
AU - Ceschia, Tino
AU - Meduri, Stefano
AU - Sibau, Angela
AU - Sacco, Cosimo
AU - Bazzocchi, Massimo
AU - Talmassons, Giovanni
AU - Morelli, Angelo
AU - Barbone, Fabio
AU - Sobrero, Alberto
PY - 2004/8
Y1 - 2004/8
N2 - Objective In this study, we addressed the influence of the observer's background and experience on the accuracy of imaging-based tumor measurements. The consistency of measures with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) vs. WHO criteria is also reported. Study design and setting Twenty-five observers (five radiologists, five thoracic surgeons, five radiotherapists, five pulmonologists, and five medical oncologists) were asked to measure three lesions on selected serial chest computed tomographic images from three non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. The observers were asked to measure the longest diameter (RECIST), along with its perpendicular diameter (WHO criteria). Measurements by radiologists were used as reference values. Results There was no significant difference in the accuracy of measurements among the different groups. The highest intraobserver consistency was achieved by radiologists. Neither familiarity with measuring tumor lesions nor years since the MD degree correlated with measurement accuracy. A comparison of RECIST and WHO criteria showed consistent response ratings (κ=.74, CI 95%=.57-.91). Conclusion Measurements of selected lesions were consistent among specialists, suggesting that assessment of tumor response is reliable even when it is not done by radiologists.
AB - Objective In this study, we addressed the influence of the observer's background and experience on the accuracy of imaging-based tumor measurements. The consistency of measures with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) vs. WHO criteria is also reported. Study design and setting Twenty-five observers (five radiologists, five thoracic surgeons, five radiotherapists, five pulmonologists, and five medical oncologists) were asked to measure three lesions on selected serial chest computed tomographic images from three non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. The observers were asked to measure the longest diameter (RECIST), along with its perpendicular diameter (WHO criteria). Measurements by radiologists were used as reference values. Results There was no significant difference in the accuracy of measurements among the different groups. The highest intraobserver consistency was achieved by radiologists. Neither familiarity with measuring tumor lesions nor years since the MD degree correlated with measurement accuracy. A comparison of RECIST and WHO criteria showed consistent response ratings (κ=.74, CI 95%=.57-.91). Conclusion Measurements of selected lesions were consistent among specialists, suggesting that assessment of tumor response is reliable even when it is not done by radiologists.
KW - Interdisciplinary comparison
KW - Lung cancer
KW - RECIST
KW - Tumor measurement
KW - WHO criteria
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=5644224428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=5644224428&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.020
DO - 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2003.12.020
M3 - Article
C2 - 15485732
AN - SCOPUS:5644224428
VL - 57
SP - 804
EP - 808
JO - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
JF - Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
SN - 0895-4356
IS - 8
ER -